History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Brown
111 N.J.L. 595
| N.J. | 1933
|
Check Treatment

The jury empaneled and sworn to try the defendant on a charge of murder was allowed to separate. When the error was discovered the jury was recalled.

"We likewise adopt as fundamentally sound the concluding statement of the Chief Justice that, in a case in which the life of the accused is at stake, the sequestering of the jury during the continuance of the trial is a `requisition of absolute law, and is not, in any measure, a matter resting in the discretion of the court.' A rule of procedure rooted in tradition and precedent, devised for the protection alike of society and the accused, should not be set aside." State v. O'Leary,110 N.J.L. 36.

The judgment is reversed to the end that there may be a venirede novo. For affirmance — None.

For reversal — THE CHANCELLOR, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, DILL, JJ. 14. *Page 596

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Brown
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Nov 23, 1933
Citation: 111 N.J.L. 595
Court Abbreviation: N.J.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.